A correct formulation for a spatially implicit predator-prey metacommunity model.

In order to mitigate the problem of increasing model complexity with increasing number of occupation states in spatially implicit metacommunity models, the assumption of independency among species distributions is often required. In the present paper, we show that this approach only works correctly if set relations among patch occupancy states are considered adequately. This is illustrated by means of a well-known, although incorrectly formulated, predator-prey metacommunity model devised by Bascompte and Solé[1]. We demonstrate that this model shows anomalous dynamical behavior caused by inconsistence between the model formulation and its assumptions. In order to formalize our finding we develop a corrected model formulation that accounts for the principles of set theory so that the sum of the system compartments change rate is nulled. Applying this method successfully rules out the occurrence of anomalous dynamical behavior found in the original model. Finally we discuss the implications of our findings for the accuracy of model predictions.

[1]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  7 – From Metapopulation Dynamics to Community Structure: Some Consequences of Spatial Heterogeneity , 1997 .

[2]  D. Mason,et al.  Effects of habitat destruction and resource supplementation in a predator-prey metapopulation model. , 2001, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  R. May,et al.  Two-Species Metapopulation Models , 1997 .

[4]  Ilkka Hanski,et al.  The Metapopulation Approach, Its History, Conceptual Domain, and Application to Conservation , 1997 .

[5]  Lenore Fahrig,et al.  Response of predators to loss and fragmentation of prey habitat: a review of theory. , 2006, Ecology.

[6]  C. Klausmeier Habitat destruction and extinction in competitive and mutualistic metacommunities , 2001 .

[7]  Robert M. May,et al.  Large-Scale Ecology and Conservation Biology. , 1995 .

[8]  D. Tilman Competition and Biodiversity in Spatially Structured Habitats , 1994 .

[9]  Montgomery Slatkin,et al.  Competition and Regional Coexistence , 1974 .

[10]  R. Levins Some Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity for Biological Control , 1969 .

[11]  Solé,et al.  Effects of habitat destruction in a prey-predator metapopulation model , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[12]  Carlos J. Melián,et al.  Food web structure and habitat loss , 2002 .

[13]  R. Levins,et al.  Regional Coexistence of Species and Competition between Rare Species. , 1971, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  M. Gilpin,et al.  Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution , 1997 .

[15]  Tamás Czárán,et al.  Spatiotemporal models of population and community dynamics , 1998 .